Steve's Explanation For Loser's Sex Scene

  • New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
  • The message board will be closed from Wednesday, June 19 at 4 PM ET to Tuesday, June 25 at 8:30 AM ET
    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

  • New 2019 Hours: The message board is closed between the hours of 4pm ET Thursday and 8:30am ET Tuesday.

    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

SeenSoFar

New Member
Jan 22, 2016
1
5
Ok seriously... I created an account just to post this. Are you seriously telling me that none of you had sexual thoughts or even sexual experiences at that age?

I'm guessing a lot of the people who are calling it gross, uncomfortable, indecent, or what have you are people with children themselves or who have children who are close and dear to them in their lives. They don't want to think about the fact that their kids, at age 12, have almost certainly had some sort of sexual experience. I'm 26 now, and kids were experimenting sexually in my elementary school long before fifth grade. Hell, I lost my virginity in the second grade to a third grade girl in the bushes beyond the soccer field behind the school at lunch hour. She was the initiator. I was not the only one. Not everyone went that far, but almost everyone was getting SOMETHING. Keep mind, kids are more sexuality educated and liberal now than when I was in school.

I think all of this is unwanted information for some people. They want to preserve that view of childhood as innocence and incorruptibility, and the thought of children engaged in the ultimate adult act does not jive with that view. Regardless of what they did during their childhood, they want to write it off as "that was different."

Some people might say "but that's now, the '50s were different times!" WRONG! My mom grew up in the '50s, was born in 1950 to be exact, and while I never enquired after her sexual exploits while she was in her tweens for obvious reasons, I have heard the stories from my uncles, who were a few years older. Specifically, there was a girl they used to go see when they were anywhere from 10-12 who would let them, in plain terms, run a train on her. They'd just take turns letting her have it. She just liked sex and was happy to get it from anyone her age who was willing and able. Now they may have grown up in a poor part of Montreal (I myself grew up in Vancouver in an affluent suburb,) but the fact remains, even in the '50s kids were experimenting sexually.

I think King was depicting realism with this scene in addition to any magical motivations that were there. I think that the people who call this smut need to get over themselves and accept that kids do this.
 

César Hernández-Meraz

Wants to be Nick, ends up as Larry
May 19, 2015
597
4,336
39
Aguascalientes, Mexico
Very true. I may have lost my virginity relatively late (at 23), but there were comparisons in elementary school. Must have been 3rd or 4th grade, perhaps even as late as 5th grade. I was a year younger than the other kids because I skipped a year, and no one touched anyone else (not in the times I was present, at least), but we were all curious about how the others looked, and we did know what they were used for. I even was nervous because I did not want to end be the smallest one (which was unnecessary, as I don't remember any one being significantly smaller than the rest). This was in the late 80s.

As I said in my previous comment, I have the impression that this kind of experimentation may have been even more prominent decades earlier.

I guess that regardless of the feelings I would have if I had children and they started that young, or with multiple partners before they have more mature personalities and emotions, one thing I know, I would wish for them to never (not their first time, not any time after that) do it in a sewer. :a17: :barf:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kurben

The Fool on the Hill
Apr 12, 2014
9,004
59,761
54
sweden
Some are talking about the Losers as if the were just typical kids. They are not. Through and through the novel is it pointed out how the fight they are in have changed them. How the monster has affected their life but also how their resistansen has affected the monster. They are not only friends , they are bond together by the ties of a common enemy and an awareness of not being able to turn to the usual channels to solve problems. (GROWNUPS). Instead they turn to each other and its not strange that they do everything they can to help eachother out. In the process of all that they growing up, maturing, faster which isn't strange. When they find themselfes in a place bordering on panic and no way out Bev finds a way to unite them all, stopping the panic and helping them all to save their lives. Such a solution, in the context of the whole book, i dont find revolting or strange at all. It is logical. It might not be clean or morally what we would wish but it is true to the story and that, to King, has always had priority. It is one of many reason i like him. To imagine that they could have walked away from that fight unblemished without some strong thing to draw them together again is, in my view, to negate some of the premises set up. He choose a sexscene. I guess it could have been something else but i don't know what would have worked as good as the thing he put down. For me it is a keyscene and it work well.
 

GNTLGNT

The idiot is IN
Jun 15, 2007
85,148
340,147
57
Cambridge, Ohio
Some are talking about the Losers as if the were just typical kids. They are not. Through and through the novel is it pointed out how the fight they are in have changed them. How the monster has affected their life but also how their resistansen has affected the monster. They are not only friends , they are bond together by the ties of a common enemy and an awareness of not being able to turn to the usual channels to solve problems. (GROWNUPS). Instead they turn to each other and its not strange that they do everything they can to help eachother out. In the process of all that they growing up, maturing, faster which isn't strange. When they find themselfes in a place bordering on panic and no way out Bev finds a way to unite them all, stopping the panic and helping them all to save their lives. Such a solution, in the context of the whole book, i dont find revolting or strange at all. It is logical. It might not be clean or morally what we would wish but it is true to the story and that, to King, has always had priority. It is one of many reason i like him. To imagine that they could have walked away from that fight unblemished without some strong thing to draw them together again is, in my view, to negate some of the premises set up. He choose a sexscene. I guess it could have been something else but i don't know what would have worked as good as the thing he put down. For me it is a keyscene and it work well.
...this is as good an explanation as any Kurben...don't let one member's spew, affect how you feel....he seems hell bent on trying to make it into some type of pornography, which it certainly isn't....
 

Kurben

The Fool on the Hill
Apr 12, 2014
9,004
59,761
54
sweden
...this is as good an explanation as any Kurben...don't let one member's spew, affect how you feel....he seems hell bent on trying to make it into some type of pornography, which it certainly isn't....
No need to worry about that, GNT. It is one the books i read most frequently. What others say wont affect my opinions unless they are wellfounded which i dont think his are. Thanks for your concern! :)
 

Aloysius Nell

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2014
309
1,008
47
Not
The Losers Club not remembering what they went through has always been my biggest sticking point with IT.
That wasn't an issue to me. It was the influence of the Turtle, both times (IMO). In the first instance, from 58-85, they were spared that because they would be needed later, to fight again. I think the lack of children was for the same reason. In the second instance, after 85, it was a kind of reward for a job well done. If you were to dwell on these kinds of experiences, you'd probably go nuts. So they were given the gift of forgetting, and having normal lives.
 

Anduan Pirate Princess

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2015
768
5,967
36
Rhode Island
It is timely for me that this thread was resurrected, since I just finished reading It for the first time a little before Christmas. It has been interesting and educational to read how other members have interpreted this particular scene, which I freely admit was a little bit jarring to me. It is even more interesting to hear Stephen's own explanation of it. I am fine with the idea that the Losers were doing a lot of out-of-the-ordinary things that summer, and this was just one more. But it was also a touching presentation of how children, in their innocence and pureness, can grasp the full meaning of a (usually) grown-up act in a way that grown-ups often ignore or forget. This was not about lust, or power, or animal instinct. It was about a powerful bond of true love and devotion.

Not something you read everyday? Of course it is. (Isn't that what makes us all Stephen King fans in the first place?) Kiddie porn? Absolutely not.
 

Robert Gray

Well-Known Member
It is timely for me that this thread was resurrected, since I just finished reading It for the first time a little before Christmas. It has been interesting and educational to read how other members have interpreted this particular scene, which I freely admit was a little bit jarring to me. It is even more interesting to hear Stephen's own explanation of it. I am fine with the idea that the Losers were doing a lot of out-of-the-ordinary things that summer, and this was just one more. But it was also a touching presentation of how children, in their innocence and pureness, can grasp the full meaning of a (usually) grown-up act in a way that grown-ups often ignore or forget. This was not about lust, or power, or animal instinct. It was about a powerful bond of true love and devotion.

Not something you read everyday? Of course it is. (Isn't that what makes us all Stephen King fans in the first place?) Kiddie porn? Absolutely not.

Well said.
 

AquinasMan

Member
Aug 9, 2015
24
84
45
It's been a while since I've read IT, but my take is pretty similar to most here. We need to remember that throughout the book, sexuality is seen as the "key" to adulthood. Perhaps what's happening here is the children, having committed an adult act by vanquishing IT, need to complete their transition to adulthood by this means. (Now that I think of it, the pattern reminds me of how Roland became a gunslinger). Then, the Turtle showed mercy on them by allowing them to forget and grow up "normally."

For me, the scene is saved from prurience by two points. First, all of the boys declared their love for Beverly (I think it was before the smoke lodge scene when they were choosing the matches, but I could be wrong). So this was no mere physical act, but a final consummation, one that perhaps established their ka-tet for the long term as another poster said. Second, there's the way that the adult Beverly and Bill react when they remember what happened. They are shocked and disturbed by the recollection, yet they understand that the act was necessary for them to survive.
 

Rose21

New Member
Feb 28, 2016
2
1
24
I stopped reading IT when I got to that scene, despite being so far through it. It wasn't so much 11 year olds having sex that disturbed me, but the situation of all of the males taking their turn with the only female of the group. I felt SK took the only strong female character of the book and degraded her by making her into a sex object (doing the exact thing her father had previously been accusing her of); I felt very disappointed in him as an author. I understand all the points people have made above about it's deeper meaning, but I believe there are ways to establish an emotional/magical connection other than to whore out the only lead female character. That is what I found disturbing.

I feel some of the people on this thread who weren't disturbed by the scene are maybe a little too lax in their views when it comes to children having sex/an 11 year old girl being used by multiple boys. I mean this in the way that I hope people's views on something like this happening in real life would be greatly different from the ones they're expressing about it's occurrence in this book! I know the scene wasn't about pleasure but you cannot ignore the sexual aspect of it due to any deeper meaning you may find - they are having sex.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mal

Rose21

New Member
Feb 28, 2016
2
1
24
I completely agree with 'Officious little prick', especially in that I find it very odd how well a lot of readers take this scene, when if it occurred in real life (I severely hope) they would find it shocking and disgusting. That's the most disturbing thing of all.
 

Dana Jean

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
49,394
211,861
Thornfield
Just for the record Rose, I didn't like this scene either and agree with the first part of what you said. I didn't feel it was necessary and could've been accomplished with all of them cutting their hands and becoming blood brothers.

But I know the folks here and this was fiction. If this were happening to a child in real life, they would step up.
 

kingricefan

All-being, keeper of Space, Time & Dimension.
Jul 11, 2006
29,246
121,974
Spokane, WA
Wow. So now I am condoning the 'rape' of a female child? Wow. It's freaking FICTION folks. FICTION! The first time I read that scene it did make me uncomfortable. Because it involved young kids having sex, yes. But, I also understood that it was an important scene showing that these kids were sharing the ultimate bond one can have with another human being. I might not have liked it when I read it, but I understood the significance. These kids were on the threshold of becoming adults at this time by facing their biggest fears that were being personified in Pennywise. As for Beverly- would you rather that her Father had raped/molested her? At least her 'first time' was with someone(s) who loved her and cherished her, not with an (in)human monster who wanted her dead (if I remember correctly her Father was possessed by Pennywise at the time).
That said- please don't ever accuse me of condoning the 'rape' of a child. Ever! EVER!
 

César Hernández-Meraz

Wants to be Nick, ends up as Larry
May 19, 2015
597
4,336
39
Aguascalientes, Mexico
I stopped reading IT when I got to that scene, despite being so far through it. It wasn't so much 11 year olds having sex that disturbed me, but the situation of all of the males taking their turn with the only female of the group. I felt SK took the only strong female character of the book and degraded her by making her into a sex object (doing the exact thing her father had previously been accusing her of); I felt very disappointed in him as an author. I understand all the points people have made above about it's deeper meaning, but I believe there are ways to establish an emotional/magical connection other than to whore out the only lead female character. That is what I found disturbing.

I feel some of the people on this thread who weren't disturbed by the scene are maybe a little too lax in their views when it comes to children having sex/an 11 year old girl being used by multiple boys. I mean this in the way that I hope people's views on something like this happening in real life would be greatly different from the ones they're expressing about it's occurrence in this book! I know the scene wasn't about pleasure but you cannot ignore the sexual aspect of it due to any deeper meaning you may find - they are having sex.
At least skip it and read what comes afterwards. The book is good and you will miss out on the rest.

I do not see this as her being used. I could actually point out that the boys did not want to do it. Even the ones who might have wanted to do it (then or a couple of years later) were uncomfortable and had to be convinced by her. If anyone was raped, I would say it was Eddie. He was totally freaked out. Because sex.

And even though his father accused her of having sex with all those boy and she ended up having sex with all those boys (perhaps, in part, as an "in your face" to his dad; perhaps to lose her virginity to them and not to someone like Henry or even her dad, in case they forced her, as was her expressed fear in the cae of Henry), I do not see it as the same thing exactly (from a certain point of view).

He accused her of something that was wrong, evil and ugly. What she did was trying to convert "it" to something that strengthened bonds.

But let's not forget. The one who initiated this and insisted on it when the boys rejected the idea was Bev. Just in case it is seen as the boys "raping" her. That was totally not the case.
 
The Institute - Coming September 10th, 2019